My Theory About Why Feminism is Currently Irrelevent to Millenials

[loramin]

Heh, plus if you're talking about female progress in society, female teachers (a profession which has been "gendered" female for centuries in America) aren't exactly the best evidence of it. It'd be like saying "look there are lots of female nurses, women are equal!" ... and not considering how (relatively) few female doctors there are.

Originally Posted by mtb tripper the 2nd [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is so wrong. I'm sick of people getting this wrong. I actually noticed that dictionaries changed the definition in the recent years. "Fem"inism. It is women's rights solely, and always was until maybe a year or two ago. Feminists started spewing this bullshit about feminism meaning equality for everyone. Equality for everyone is egalitarianism. Tranny pos.

Someone needs to re-read their history books. Since it's inception feminism has always been about equality of the genders. Egalitarianism is a more general term for the equality of all peoples, not specifically the different genders.

Originally Posted by Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906)

Men, their rights, and nothing more; women, their rights, and nothing less.

Originally Posted by Susan B. Anthony (1820-1906)

The day may be approaching when the whole world will recognize woman as the equal of man.

But you have to remember, just saying "women are equal to men" was a radical idea for the vast majority of human history. It's so easy to dismiss both what feminists in the past have done AND what feminist work still needs to be done precisely because those women fought and made great strides towards winning that equality (ie. because the feminists made this a much more feminist world, it's harder to see that it still is far from equal).

[maskedmelon]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

(ie. because the feminists made this a much more feminist world, it's harder to see that it still is far from equal).

so long as we keep faith in oppression it may continue to haunt us. unfortunately for contemporary feminists, rule-of-thumb laws have been abolished, women's sufferage achieved and modesty marginalized. There is naught for them to do, but wage wars on imagined issues, sound science and ordinary thinking.

[fash]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Someone needs to re-read their history books.

Gotta agree with ya here.

White supremacy will be strengthened, not weakened, by women’s suffrage.

--Carrie Chapman Catt, founder of the League of Women Voters

The enfranchisement of women would insure immediate and durable white supremacy, honestly attained, for upon unquestioned authority it is stated that in every southern state but one there are more educated women than all the illiterate voters, white and black, native and foreign, combined.

--Belle Kearny, suffragist, first female Senator of Mississippi

Alien illiterates rule our cities today; the saloon is their palace, and the toddy stick, their scepter. The colored race multiplies like the locusts of Egypt.

--Frances Willard, feminist lecturer, founder of the National Council of Women, women's suffragist, instrumental in the passage of the 19th amendment

What will we and our daughters suffer if these degraded black men are allowed to have the rights that would make them even worse than our Saxon fathers?

--Elizabeth Cady Stanton, suffragist, social activist, abolitionist, and leading figure of the early women's rights movement, woke feminist

The white men, reinforced by the educated white women, could ‘snow under’ the negro vote in every state, and the white race would maintain its supremacy without corrupting or intimidating the negroes.

--Laura Clay, founder and first president of the Kentucky Equal Rights Association, leader of the American women's suffrage movement, powerful orator, active in the Democratic Party

Wew, these woke feminists are too edgy for me.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by fash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Gotta agree with ya here.











Wew, these woke feminists are too edgy for me.

Wow, people 70+ years ago (even some feminists) were racist? [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Seriously though, people are a product of their time, and humanity has gotten better over time. Many historical figures had terrible flaws: Ghandi basically killed his wife (by not letting the doctors give her penicillin) and was a racist, Mother Theresa was largely a church fundraiser and not a humanitarian, MLK cheated on his wife and (at the end) was basically a communist ... you get the idea.

But still I don't think the fact that human beings are flawed disproves the relevance of rights groups.

[fash]

Originally Posted by loramin [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But still I don't think the fact that human beings are flawed disproves the relevance of rights groups.

Heh, of course. That wasn't my point. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But, do you think they raised legitimate points?

[loramin]

Originally Posted by fash [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

But, do you think they raised legitimate points?

"White supremacy will be strengthened, not weakened, by women’s suffrage."
"The enfranchisement of women would insure immediate and durable white supremacy"

History seems to have proven both of those wrong, as I'm pretty sure white supremacy as a belief has declined since then. No legit points there.


"Alien illiterates rule our cities today; the saloon is their palace, and the toddy stick, their scepter. The colored race multiplies like the locusts of Egypt."

The context of that quote was that she had just come back from the South and was bitter that her temperance (no booze) campaign had failed, so she was blaming black people. Hard for me to have any sympathy for someone like that. She probably has a legit point about "illiterates" though. After all it's to be expected that a people only a few generations removed from slavery (when literacy was punishable by death), and who were still heavily repressed, might not have the best reading skills.


"What will we and our daughters suffer if these degraded black men are allowed to have the rights that would make them even worse than our Saxon fathers?"

Flat out racist; everyone deserves rights, even if that's somehow inconvenient for Elizabeth Cady Stanton. But you have to keep people's context in consideration before judging them, and she was from a different time so ... /shrug I'm not judging her, I just don't think she has a legit point.


"The white men, reinforced by the educated white women, could ‘snow under’ the negro vote in every state, and the white race would maintain its supremacy without corrupting or intimidating the negroes."

Yeah, white people had lots of options for disenfranchising black people (aka Jim Crow), and they continued to do so up until the civil right movement (and after too, to a lesser extent). Saying white people had ways to screw over black people during that era is plain and simple history, ie. definitely a legit point.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by mtb tripper the 2nd [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are so full of shit dude. Don't tell me to read a history book. How on earth could you argue your point? Ask a linguist, or a professor of first or second wave feminism what they think of the word feminism you fucking shill.

Hope liberal arts is treating your checkbook well, loser.

I would assume English isn't your first language, if it was you would likely understand the prefix and suffix of the word FEMINISM

I was actually an English (well, Modern Literature, same diff) major ... but what you're talking about is Linguistics, not English.

Luckily however I lived with multiple linguists (and had even more in my D&D group; yes we had a character named "!xabu"). If any of them were here I promise they would tell you that words are not in fact defined by their Latin roots (prefix, suffix, or otherwise), but rather by what people think they mean. What you're referring to is commonly known as the etymological fallacy.

Getting back to the topic at hand, I think it's pretty clear what (most) first- or second- wave feminists meant when they used the word, but since you didn't like Susan B. Anthony I suspect you'd just dispute any feminist scholar I could quote, so let's let Wikipedia settle the debate. Here's the very first sentence of the "feminism" article:

Originally Posted by https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feminism

Feminism is a range of political movements, ideologies, and social movements that share a common goal: to define, establish, and achieve political, economic, personal, and social equality of sexes.

P.S. Now just to be clear (so that I don't get accused of making an etymological fallacy myself [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] ), I understand "feminism" means different things to different people, and it legitimately means "man-hater" to some people. I'm not trying to dispute that, I'm just arguing that for most feminists, today or historically, feminism refers to the fight for gender equality.

[loramin]

Originally Posted by mtb tripper the 2nd [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

This is from 2010
https://web.archive.org/web/20100216.../wiki/Feminism

"The term feminism can be used to describe a political, cultural or economic movement aimed at establishing equal rights and legal protection for women."

C'mon don't cherry-pick, keep going ...

The term feminism can be used to describe a political, cultural or economic movement aimed at establishing equal rights and legal protection for women. Feminism involves political, cultural and sociological theories, as well as philosophies concerned with issues of gender difference. It is also a movement that advocates gender equality for women and campaigns for women's rights and interests.

So because someone moved the equality part from sentence #3 to sentence #1 in a more recent version of the page, this makes feminism not about equality?

And again, we're only even looking at Wikipedia because the words of an actual feminist like Susan B. Anthony (who was so central to the feminist movement she got her own coin!) weren't good enough. But if you want to keep burying your head in the sand I can all but guarantee (having done no advance googling at all) that I could find several more quotes from several other famous historical feminists.

[Patriam1066]

"Feminist scholar"

Now there's an oxymoron

[fash]

It was "rights for women" long before it became "equality for the genders" in the 80s or maybe before.

I might have already said this here, but you're too idealistic in how you represent groups or movements like feminism. Instead of paining an accurate picture of the group, you put forth only the abstract ideals they hide behind, as if you're either peddling their propaganda or falling for it.

Stalinism was all about freeing the workers from the capitalists, not the mass murders.

The Patriot Act was all about patriotism, not infringing on civil liberties and privacy. It's right there in the name!